NationStates Jolt Archive

Isn't there a rule that UN resolutions can't try to ban any particular forms of government? Please take a look at the 'Church-State Relations Law' that's in the current list of proposals, and decide whether it's too incompatible with the existence of Theocracies to be allowable...

Use the GHP (http://www.nationstates.net/page=help) for reporting illegal proposals. As it is, though, I seem to remember the mods saying a carefully worded proposal on separation of church and state wouldn't necessarily be illegal. I can't judge in this case, obviously.

Use the GHP (http://www.nationstates.net/page=help) for reporting illegal proposals. As it is, though, I seem to remember the mods saying a carefully worded proposal on separation of church and state wouldn't necessarily be illegal. I can't judge in this case, obviously.

Oops!
Will do so.

Church-State Relations Law
A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Symponium

Description: Recognising:
That a large number of citizens of UN member states hold religious views;
Furthermore, that it is their inalienable right so to do;

However recognising also:
That a number of UN member states support, financially and politically, established religious institutions;
That in some member states these organisations enjoy the status of "state religion";

To protect against possible discrimination both in the civil sense, and regarding financial affairs, against citizens of UN states holding religious beliefs differing from those supported by the states in which they are resident, including those holding no religious belief, where such arrangements may exist;

It is hereby proposed that the United Nations Resolve to reduce political and financial power vested in, and held by, religious institutions in member states, through the following actions;

A stoppage of donations by government bodies in member states to religious institutions, in acknowledgement that such actions may not be justified in the eyes in the eyes of a substantial segment of the populace, for reasons of differing or non-existent religious belief;

A clarification of permissible political activities in which religious institutions can engage or be accommodated in member states, according to the following guidelines;

- A requirement for all political offices held by recognised members of religious institutions to have been achieved through direct democratic processes; and so an outlawing of political positions held through religious affiliations solely;

- An undertaking by all member states to ensure that any religious institutions existing within any state cannot interfere in any way with the democratic process; including but not limited to the process of elections and due system of legislature (excepting the practice of inciting religious followers to act politically during elections, which is deemed acceptable by the UN assembly, provided it is carried out in a "responsible manner", defined as that which shall not bring aforementioned religious followers or other members of that society to harm for reasons solely of religious doctrine or dogma);

- An undertaking by member states to ensure that religious institutions do not abuse positions of power gained through the democratic process through enacting laws specifically designed to disempower or harm sections of society due to their religious beliefs, or lack of the aforementioned;

- A recognition by member states that civil law in any member state supersedes church or religious laws adhered to by any member of that state’s populace;

- And an undertaking by member states to outlaw the accommodation by any member state of institutionalised religious practice, including, but not limited to, religious observance, religious symbology, and the promotion of religious ideology in state education systems and through state-owned media;
Excepting the cases where such practices and symbology are displayed purely for the reasons of national tradition, and are unlikely cause discomfort to those holding other or no religious views.

It is finally undertaken that this resolution may not be used as grounds for restricting the activities of religious institutions beyond those required by this resolution.
This one's not blatantly illegal, so I wanted to include my reasoning instead of just quietly deleting it. Since it's due to expire today (far from quorum), and I have no intention of warning the author, it's still in place.

There are ways to set up a Separation clause that still allows for theocracy, but this isn't one of them.

The two sections in red are where it crossed the line. The proposal specifically denies any church from being able to play a role in national politics when even one citizen disagrees. Also, anything that specifically disenfranchises a potentially large percentage of a nation's citizens probably shouldn't be categorized "Human Rights".